IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v161y2014i1p157-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of consumer advocates on regulatory policy in the electric utility sector

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Fremeth
  • Guy Holburn
  • Pablo Spiller

Abstract

We examine the effect of consumer advocate participation in administrative procedures on regulatory policy. We use a unique panel database of rate reviews conducted for US electric utilities from 1980 to 2007 to assess how state consumer advocates affect Public Utility Commission decisions on utilities’ allowed financial returns and rate structures. We find first that utilities experience fewer rate reviews in states with consumer advocates, consistent with utilities strategically postponing requests for rate increases. Second, after controlling for observed and unobserved state characteristics, we find that PUCs in states with consumer advocates permit returns on equity that are on average 0.45 percentage points lower than states without advocates—equivalent to a $7.9 million (3.7 %) reduction in average utility operating income, all else equal. Third, consumer advocates are associated with lower residential rates relative to other customer classes. Our findings provide statistical support for the thesis that institutionalizing interest group representation in administrative procedures is one way for legislatures indirectly to influence agency-determined policies. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Fremeth & Guy Holburn & Pablo Spiller, 2014. "The impact of consumer advocates on regulatory policy in the electric utility sector," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 157-181, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:161:y:2014:i:1:p:157-181
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-013-0145-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11127-013-0145-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-013-0145-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guy Holburn & Richard Bergh, 2006. "Consumer capture of regulatory institutions: The creation of public utility consumer advocates in the United States," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 45-73, January.
    2. Smart, Susan R, 1994. "The Consequences of Appointment Methods and Party Control for Telecommunications Pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 301-323, Summer.
    3. Mashaw, Jerry L, 1985. "Prodelegation: Why Administrators Should Make Political Decisions," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 81-100, Spring.
    4. Semykina, Anastasia & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2010. "Estimating panel data models in the presence of endogeneity and selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 157(2), pages 375-380, August.
    5. de Figueiredo, Rui J P, Jr & Vanden Bergh, Richard G, 2004. "The Political Economy of State-Level Administrative Procedure Acts," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(2), pages 569-588, October.
    6. Kalt, Joseph P & Zupan, Mark A, 1984. "Capture and Ideology in the Economic Theory of Politics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 279-300, June.
    7. Stephen Littlechild, 2009. "Stipulated settlements, the consumer advocate and utility regulation in Florida," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 96-109, February.
    8. Patrick Puhani, 2000. "The Heckman Correction for Sample Selection and Its Critique," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 53-68, February.
    9. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    10. Walter J. Primeaux, Jr. & Patrick C. Mann, 1986. "Regulator Selection Methods and Electricity Prices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(1), pages 1-13.
    11. J. Myles Shaver, 1998. "Accounting for Endogeneity When Assessing Strategy Performance: Does Entry Mode Choice Affect FDI Survival?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 571-585, April.
    12. Doucet, J. & Littlechild, S., 2006. "Negotiated Settlements: The development of economic and legal thinking," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0622, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    14. Claude Ménard & Michel Ghertman (ed.), 2009. "Regulation, Deregulation, Reregulation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13188.
    15. Doucet, Joseph & Littlechild, Stephen, 2006. "Negotiated settlements: The development of legal and economic thinking," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 266-277, December.
    16. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    17. de Figueiredo, Rui J P, Jr & Spiller, Pablo T & Urbiztondo, Santiago, 1999. "An Informational Perspective on Administrative Procedures," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 283-305, April.
    18. Susan R. Smart, 1994. "The Consequences of Appointment Methods and Party Control for Telecommunications Pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 301-323, June.
    19. Joskow, Paul L, 1974. "Inflation and Environmental Concern: Structural Change in the Process of Public Utility Price Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(2), pages 291-327, October.
    20. Bonardi, Jean-Philippe & Holburn, Guy & Vanden Bergh, Rick, 2006. "Nonmarket performance: Evidence from U.S. electric utilities," MPRA Paper 14437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn, 2012. "Information Asymmetries and Regulatory Decision Costs: An Analysis of U.S. Electric Utility Rate Changes 1980--2000," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 127-162.
    22. Sigelman, Lee & Zeng, Langche, 1999. "Analyzing Censored and Sample-Selected Data with Tobit and Heckit Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 167-182, December.
    23. R. Blaine Roberts & G.S. Maddala & Gregory Enholm, 1978. "Determinants of the Requested Rate of Return and the Rate of Return Granted in a Formal Regulatory Process," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 611-621, Autumn.
    24. Robert L. Hagerman & Brian T. Ratchford, 1978. "Some Determinants of Allowed Rates of Return on Equity to Electric Utilities," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(1), pages 46-55, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeffrey T. Macher & John W. Mayo & Olga Ukhaneva & Glenn A. Woroch, 2017. "From universal service to universal connectivity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 77-104, August.
    2. Wang, Yong & Li, Lin, 2015. "Time-of-use electricity pricing for industrial customers: A survey of U.S. utilities," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 89-103.
    3. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    4. Sirin, Selahattin Murat & Camadan, Ercument & Erten, Ibrahim Etem & Zhang, Alex Hongliang, 2023. "Market failure or politics? Understanding the motives behind regulatory actions to address surging electricity prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    5. Eun-Hee Kim & Yoo Na Youm, 2017. "How Do Social Media Affect Analyst Stock Recommendations? Evidence from S&P 500 Electric Power Companies' Twitter Accounts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(13), pages 2599-2622, December.
    6. Fremeth, Adam R. & Holburn, Guy L. F. & Piazza, Alessandro, 2021. "Activist Protest Spillovers into the Regulatory Domain: Theory and Evidence from the U.S. Nuclear Power Generation Industry," OSF Preprints s39h2, Center for Open Science.
    7. Heims, Eva M. & Lodge, Martin, 2018. "Customer engagement in UK water regulation: towards a collaborative regulatory state?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87258, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fremeth, Adam R. & Holburn, Guy L. F. & Piazza, Alessandro, 2021. "Activist Protest Spillovers into the Regulatory Domain: Theory and Evidence from the U.S. Nuclear Power Generation Industry," OSF Preprints s39h2, Center for Open Science.
    2. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    3. Guy Holburn & Richard Bergh, 2006. "Consumer capture of regulatory institutions: The creation of public utility consumer advocates in the United States," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 45-73, January.
    4. Littlechild, Stephen, 2012. "The process of negotiating settlements at FERC," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 174-191.
    5. Troy Quast, 2008. "Do elected public utility commissioners behave more politically than appointed ones?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 318-337, June.
    6. Rode, David C. & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2019. "Regulated equity returns: A puzzle," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    7. Stephen Littlechild, 2012. "Regulation and Customer Engagement," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    8. Duso, Tomaso & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2010. "The political economy of mobile telecommunications liberalization: Evidence from the OECD countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 199-216, June.
    9. Parinandi, Srinivas & Hitt, Matthew P., 2018. "How Politics Influences the Energy Pricing Decisions of Elected Public Utilities Commissioners," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 77-87.
    10. Jivas Chakravarthy & Katie E. McDermott & Roger M. White, 2021. "Are Regulators Effective at Unraveling Accounting Manipulation? Evidence from Public Utility Commissions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4532-4555, July.
    11. Robert Hahn & Robert Metcalfe & Florian Rundhammer, 2020. "Promoting customer engagement: A new trend in utility regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 121-149, January.
    12. Stephen Littlechild, 2011. "Regulation, customer protection and customer engagement," Working Papers EPRG 1119, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    13. Guilhem Bascle, 2008. "Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research," Post-Print hal-00576795, HAL.
    14. Timothy Besley & Anne Case, 2003. "Political Institutions and Policy Choices: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(1), pages 7-73, March.
    15. Bordignon, Stephen & Littlechild, Stephen, 2012. "The Hunter Valley access undertaking: Elements of a negotiated settlement," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 179-187.
    16. Spiller, Pablo T., 2013. "Transaction cost regulation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 232-242.
    17. Palmer, Karen & Ando, Amy, 1998. "Getting on the Map: The Political Economy of State-Level Electricity Restructuring," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-19-rev, Resources for the Future.
    18. Littlechild, Stephen, 2009. "The bird in hand: Stipulated settlements in the Florida electricity sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3-4), pages 276-287, September.
    19. Stephen Littlechild, 2006. "Stipulations, the consumer advocate and utility regulation in Florida+," Working Papers EPRG 0615, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    20. Nooraisah Katmon & Omar Al Farooque, 2017. "Exploring the Impact of Internal Corporate Governance on the Relation Between Disclosure Quality and Earnings Management in the UK Listed Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(2), pages 345-367, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electric utilities; Consumer advocates; Special interest groups; Regulation; H70; H73; K23; L51; L94; Q48;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H70 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - General
    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:161:y:2014:i:1:p:157-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.